View Full Version : Do you feel like there's a "new normal" for your climate?
After this week, I don't know what to think. I had been hoping that 2012 was a scary anomaly; something that would become more frequent but not yet the new normal every year. We had a somewhat dry winter but a nice wet spring sort of caught us up such that the extreme drought was downgraded to "serious drought" or even just "abnormally dry" in places. June brought a few days of hot, dry, windy weather and boom: fires. While summer fires aren't unusual, the fact that it's less than a year since our most recent "most destructive fire" which came a couple of days after the prior "most destructive fire", those 2 years after the prior "most destructive fire". Meaning that the most destructive fire in 2010 is now only fourth most destructive as of yesterday. Part of it is changes in population: something like 1 in 4 or 5 people in CO live in high fire risk areas, but also the fires have gotten larger and less predictable. The bad drought/fire year in 2002 was spaced by nearly a decade of sort of normal years, but now it seems like every year is a bad fire year. My county had large fires with evacuations in May 2012, June 2012, October 2012, December 2012 and March 2013 and yes it *snowed* out a couple of those fires. Now, I grew up in this area and remember a few times as a kid when we couldn't have recess outside because it was smoky from a wildfire so of course they happened. But I also remember being shocked by the 2002 drought and made the decision then to xeriscape the front yard. We missed a couple of years here when we lived in Phoenix but it feels like now things are different from when we lived here til 2008, not just with fires but also the snow pattern for the mountains (ie skiing and avalanche risk). Maybe I'm just still a little freaked out about last year and 2 years in a row does not make a true pattern. So I wanted to ask whether anyone else feels like maybe the last 5 years seems a little different from before (if you've lived somewhere for a long time). Humans are prone to make patterns where none exist so I wonder if I'm overreacting or just sensing the same thing as others.
The pattern I've seen, from where we live and from the news around the world, is that extreme weather is simply becoming more normal.
Here, we had an incredibly early spring last year; this year, it snowed throughout April and even on May 2. The difference in last frost dates for last year and this was probably about 8 or 9 weeks. While similar events may have happened over recorded weather time, I suspect it is rather unusual to have the opposite extremes happen in consecutive years.
ApatheticNoMore
6-15-13, 12:29am
Yes in more ways than I can frankly remember right now to articulate so I'm not sure I can be super convincing so perhaps I'll try for poetic - many times I have reflected that I notice the changes because I've been here ages, and I wonder how many people even experience them in such a moble society (do they need to read the news to know, just because they don't have long term memories of one place? haven't been somewhere decades ...). But in concrete terms: there are more real heat waves, summer used to basically be pleasant - not so much now. The heat waves can occur earlier in the year, there are more *hot* days in winter, more fires, fires earlier in the year, lots of droughts. I've never thought this was a particularly good place to be in terms of climate change, still not really convinced it is frankly, but apparently the middle of the country is just going to fry. :\
No, just rain as usual here. ;)
poetry_writer
6-15-13, 9:08am
in 2011 we had the longest stretch of drought and hot as hell weather on record for us (Texas). It was above 100 for days and days with no rain...the highest i saw was 113. Forest land died. Trees withered...........This winter was the first time ever we had a white Christmas
. No one could believe it and us Texans loved it! Spring has been unusually cool and rainy for us and we just now getting in to the very hot weather. I think the weather is more extreme everywhere.
We're in an area where the changes that are occurring seem to be making our local climate better. Our summers are becoming a bit more summery (whereas before we wouldn't be surprised to go through summers with the parka still in the front closet, for those chilly summer nights). Our winters have been a bit more mild. We haven't had any significant change in superstorm frequency. (Sandy was one storm, and you cannot establish a trend based on one storm.)
Where I live, there is not enough data yet to pull any signal out of the noise of normal variation.
I just finished up a 3 year long regulatory project here controlling our county's hundreds of miles of shoreline, and the data I do have show no noticeable sea level rise since the 1800s.
Human brains are very good at seeing patterns where there aren't any, and "reasoning" from anecdote. Math is more reliable when used properly.
Living in Central TX for way too long now and looking back... I noticed a change here about 10-12 years ago. I suspect it is the new normal. Except for a few rainy summers, it has gotten hotter and much drier. 2011 was horrendous but so far this summer is more tolerable. I was talking to one of the custodians at work about the heat and she said that here in Texas we are spoiled by air-conditioning - that back home in Mexico it seemed more temperate without A/C, ie no extremes.
SteveinMN
6-15-13, 11:16am
Apparently we're now a USDA Plant Hardiness Zone warmer than we used to be. That's something (and math :) ).
Apparently we're now a USDA Plant Hardiness Zone warmer than we used to be. That's something (and math :) ).
Note that this change may be due to better data set and interpretation, as well as the creation of new zones, compared to the Olde Maps:
http://www.ars.usda.gov/is/pr/2012/120125.htm
I've lived in Colorado my whole life and remember (as well as my memory goes) that we've always had forest fires. I think what has changed is that instead of fires being more in the mountain areas, lately they have been in the foothills where there are large areas of ponderosa pines. This is definitely different. As I understand it, the hot fires that have gone through these forests prevent the ponderosas from reseeding and may take centuries to re vegetate in their native trees. Unlike the forest fires that go through the deeper mountains and other varieties of pines where fires historically have been a part of the natural forest process. At least that is my amateur take. I guess the question I have is whether these fires are due to a change in the climate, or just more people being careless or otherwise something with higher density populations living in the foothills?
That said, I do think there are signs of a different climate. Beetle kill among the pines is climate related and has been catastrophic. Sudden aspen decline (SAD) is threatening major stands of aspen groves. These are affecting forests that have been relatively unchanged for centuries or longer. That seems more signal than noise to me. The decline and extinction of amphibians may or may not be climate related, but has some probability of being human influence. I have helped monitor northern leopard frogs, which were once common along the front range and are now rather rare. Bird migration times and ranges are different.
Yes, I've noticed things are different, but I don't think it is a new "normal" by my definition.
Something has changed.
Well there is data (http://csfs.colostate.edu/pages/documents/COLORADOWILDFIRES_reprt_table_cb_000.pdf) suggesting this is not my imagination. I too remember fires even close to the Front Range, but the data from the last 40-50 years suggests the fires are getting bigger. I don't think the records indicate heat of the fire so no way to tell if they are in fact hotter and more damaging. However, the fact that fires are bigger could be due not only to climate change but also the nearly 100 years of complete fire suppression policy. That has had the impact of making forests *much* more dense-in some cases with 10X the number of trees per acre than would be there with regular small fires. It also could have skewed the data on fire size, since fires were never allowed to get large. The pine beetles are actually naturally endemic to the West, but the recent epidemic is likely exacerbated by climate change since in a warm winter the beetles can reproduce twice.
I wonder if the ski resorts have snow records dating back a long way, since fire data has those confounding factors.
It seems to be actually getting more humid with tropical type storms here in coastal SoCal, and but drier in the inland areas. This has been a record year of low rainfall and the Santa Ana winds (very hot dry high winds coming from the deserts) seem to come at all times of the year rather than just in late summer and fall like in the past. Have had a lot of those this year and started several wildfires.
However, the fact that fires are bigger could be due not only to climate change but also the nearly 100 years of complete fire suppression policy. That has had the impact of making forests *much* more dense-in some cases with 10X the number of trees per acre than would be there with regular small fires.
My neighborhood suffers from the same fire suppression issues, and a few years back the state declared us to be one of the top endangered spots in the state, and the local fire department told us they basically wouldn't come in here during a wildfire event, as it was too dangerous. We've been following the Firewise program (http://firewise.org/), clearing out fuel and making defensive spaces, and it's been helping.
I spent most of Thursday night keeping this one from burning my house down, we stopped it 4 lots away from mine. 10 years ago we would have lost the whole side of the mountain I suspect.
https://lh6.googleusercontent.com/-RpZgJ1MfwzA/UbyyLgXTCPI/AAAAAAAAH-s/JW3j6LxnEPg/s640/wildfire.jpg
So, that was fun. Especially since the next lot in from where it stopped was just packed with underbrush that hadn't been cleared and overly dense trees. Absentee land-owners who haven't built yet seem to slack a bit on the Firewise business....
Note that this change may be due to better data set and interpretation, as well as the creation of new zones, compared to the Olde Maps
From the link (bolding mine):
The new map is generally one 5-degree Fahrenheit half-zone warmer than the previous map throughout much of the United States. This is mostly a result of using temperature data from a longer and more recent time period; the new map uses data measured at weather stations during the 30-year period 1976-2005. In contrast, the 1990 map was based on temperature data from only a 13-year period of 1974-1986.
However, some of the changes in the zones are a result of new, more sophisticated methods for mapping zones between weather stations. These include algorithms that considered for the first time such factors as changes in elevation, nearness to large bodies of water, and position on the terrain, such as valley bottoms and ridge tops. Also, the new map used temperature data from many more stations than did the 1990 map. These advances greatly improved the accuracy and detail of the map, especially in mountainous regions of the western United States. In some cases, they resulted in changes to cooler, rather than warmer, zones.
Yet with all that additional accuracy, we are a Zone warmer than before. There are some considerations re: statistics and their collection and, without going beyond 1974, it's hard to better demonstrate a long-term trend. But 29 years is a human generation or two, so there are a number of people who will perceive the changes documented by these numbers. I don't want to get into whether global warming is a Thing or something we can do anything about (now or at any earlier time); I will just note that, having lived here for 30 years, the weather has been warmer lately, winter and summer. The Plant Hardiness Zone map corroborates that using even more information than we had before.
Steve,
I read the rest of the text quite differently - the reclassification being a result of better data and better models, but not that the underlying physical reality had necessarily changed. Don't confuse the map for the terrain, and all that.
I read the rest of the text quite differently - the reclassification being a result of better data and better models, but not that the underlying physical reality had necessarily changed. Don't confuse the map for the terrain, and all that.
So you're saying our Zone reclassification is simply a more accurate rendering of the way it's been all along? I'll buy that.
The problem with determining climate change is that we don't have centuries of data to examine. I do know we've seen some extreme weather in the last maybe six years or so. And the Zone reclassification. Maybe it's a coincidence (the Zone does not measure variability, as such). But the weather around here is not what most natives (which is 'most everyone here) are used to.
The problem with determining climate change is that we don't have centuries of data to examine. I do know we've seen some extreme weather in the last maybe six years or so.
I think the premise of human influenced climate change is having a valid theory, making model projections based on the theory, making historical observations, and then matching present day observations to the projections of the model to validate the theory. So it is more than just the last few years of data, but goes back to things like matching CO2 levels trapped in ancient ice to corresponding global temperatures at the same time and in addition to current validations. Not to get into another global warming debate or dispute anything posted, but just to add a little. It is complicated and with some unknowns, so will always be a science of risk management. When we know with absolute certainty or with nearly indisputable evidence, it might be too late to manage.
SteveinMN
6-15-13, 10:57pm
When we know with absolute certainty or with nearly indisputable evidence, it might be too late to manage.
There's that, too. I'd rather save my energy for the what-do-do war rather than the how-did-this-happen war. :treadmill:
i haven't lived in any one place for too long, but when I lived in PA, there was an obvious cycle to the weather. It went like this:
1. yr 1: crazy-ass winter with lots of blizzards and stuff!!!!!!! thundersnow!!!!!!
comments from everyone: this is the worst winter we have EVER had and it was never like this before!
2. yr 2: 1/3 less crazy-ass winter
comments form everyone: this is the worst winter we have EVER had and it was never like this before!
3. yr 3: 2/3 less crazy-ass winter
comments from everyone: this winter is way too dry. it never was like this. I remember back when I was a kid and it was always snow up to your eyeballs and lots of sledding and days off from school/work! Global warming!!!!!
4. yr 4: cold winter -- consistent light snow showers, not a lot of ground accumulation, bitterly cold, though
comments from everyone: this winter is way too dry. it was never like this. I remember back when I was a kid and it was always now up to your eyeballs and lots of sledding and days off from school/work! Global warming!!!!!!!
5. yr 5: mild winter -- mostly rain, some rain/snow mix, not a lot of accumulation, pretty warm all winter -- freezing nights but "mild" days in the high 30s/low 40s.
comments from everyone: this winter isn't that bad, but I remember how we used to get snow. I miss the snow. Global warming.
THEN it would repeat. Now, I only lived there from age 18 to age 33 -- so three cycles -- but it seemed pretty obvious to me. And my sister's reporting of the weather on FB seems pretty clear that it's still doing it's thing.
Now, i've only lived in this place for 3 years. First year was RAIN in winter. Second year was RAINY RAIN RAIN in winter. Third year was DROUGHT in winter. apparently, after drought winters -- if other ex pats are to be trusted (so many people just complain about the weather rather than enjoy it or chart it or just you know, pay attention to it without judgment) -- comes the "normal NZ summer" which is basically a mixture of sunny/warm and rainy/cold days.
I hope so, because my aunt edna is coming back this christmas, and we were so hampered by the rain when she came. And when my parents were here, it was terrible -- trapped inside it what it felt like. And then with my ILs, they got all the really glorious weather. :P so, i'm hoping that edna gets some decent weather so that we can hike.
I'm thinking we'll do the tongariro crossing (http://www.tongarirocrossing.org.nz).
Yes, Bae, I think this (http://www.nytimes.com/2013/06/15/us/in-colorado-nature-takes-a-fiery-toll-despite-a-communitys-efforts-to-prepare.html?src=recg) is similar to what you're talking about. Some people don't do anything to mitigate, either because they are absentee (which would quickly get out of hand in the PNW!) or because they moved to the mountains because they want forest. I see it every time I go up in the mountains: houses with trees touching the roof or sides, and trees so thick you can barely see a house there. My mom's friend used to live in one of the canyons that burned last summer, and at the time she lived there she said she "wanted to hear the branches brushing the roof". Somehow, that house didn't burn, no doubt due to major efforts from firefighters. Myself, I choose to live where wildfire risk is lowest and go up to the mountains for fun with a tent. I told DH I would never have my primary residence be up in the mountains or even foothills. Others accept the risk or deny the risk. The question is who enforces fire mitigation, who pays for it, and who pays for firefighting. Right now I pay for the fire fighting as a taxpayer. Mitigation is possibly enforced by neighborhood associations, somewhat by insurance companies (who are rapidly getting much more interested in what the property and neighborhood look like in WUIs), or not at all. No idea who, if anyone, pays for mitigation beyond homeowners. This leads to an economic incentive to build and buy in WUIs but not really to do much mitigation unless one's insurance requires it and does an inspection. Some choose to forgo insurance either because they are wealthy enough or because they fall on one political extreme or the other and have somehow skirted the requirement if they aren't squatters or some such. The latter are the ones least likely to do mitigation, most likely to chafe at government requirements to mitigate fire danger and most likely to be left with nothing when their residence goes up in flames. Denial ain't just a river in Egypt, if you know what I mean. Sigh.
To Zoebird, yeah, things do go in cycles. 2013 is not 2012, thank goodness-probably at least 10F cooler than last June and about a 0.3" more rain (perhaps a centimeter). I don't ever remember paying this much attention to fires except 2002, and it seems like the ski snow has gotten unpredictable too. This year, April was so good the resorts extended the season an extra weekend, and could have again if not for regs and staffing. However, it wasn't worth going up before about Valentine's day, whereas last season the best time was before Christmas and by March it was bleak. So yes, hard to say if it's a rough patch that will smooth out down the road.
Phoenix is definitely getting hotter, mainly due to the "heat island" effect - the population increase also increases demand for housing, roads, etc. These things absorb heat during the day and then radiate heat at night. Our nighttime temps are staying higher than ever - we're just not getting a cooling off even after sundown.
We're also in the 13th year of drought. You'd think this would get someone's attention at the state legislature, but alas, they are busy with stuff like deciding which new restrictions they can put on abortion services, etc. So in the meantime any homeowner can decide to put in the biggest pool they can fit in their yard, and then landscape it with tropical plants, all legal as long as they can pay the (ridiculously artificially low) water bills. Water conservation is not even on the radar.
I don't know if this place will even be livable in 2050.
Phoenix is definitely getting hotter, mainly due to the "heat island" effect - the population increase also increases demand for housing, roads, etc. These things absorb heat during the day and then radiate heat at night. Our nighttime temps are staying higher than ever - we're just not getting a cooling off even after sundown.
We're also in the 13th year of drought. You'd think this would get someone's attention at the state legislature, but alas, they are busy with stuff like deciding which new restrictions they can put on abortion services, etc. So in the meantime any homeowner can decide to put in the biggest pool they can fit in their yard, and then landscape it with tropical plants, all legal as long as they can pay the (ridiculously artificially low) water bills. Water conservation is not even on the radar.
I don't know if this place will even be livable in 2050.
Yes, I was astounded by Phoenix's use of water. Yes, they have multiple sources of water but most of them ultimately come from some mountains somewhere, such as the San Juans. I will say, they do have fewer big green lawns than I see here in CO. OTOH, the grass here usually only gets watered 6pm to 10am or even just at night, whereas I observed automatic watering at 2pm in July in Phoenix. Some people's attitude was to use as much water as possible in the yard in order to grow more trees which would help cool the desert. I suppose that theory should work, and some purported to have evidence that it was much more lush before they diverted the "rivers" around for irrigation. I'm not certain how true that is, because the source was a little kooky. But they were not using it for pools, and a bunch of large trees does cool the landscape plus provide mulch for further organic matter to grow so I can see their point to some degree. As for the pool thing, when we were moving down there pretty much everyone asked if we were going to get a place with a pool. We didn't, but I bet most of the folks who move there from wherever think that way, and won't consider not having one. Possibly because they don't know how unpleasant it actually is to sit in a 100F degree pool on a 115F day....
So in the meantime any homeowner can decide to put in the biggest pool they can fit in their yard, and then landscape it with tropical plants, all legal as long as they can pay the (ridiculously artificially low) water bills. Water conservation is not even on the radar.
Substitute the word "oil" for "water" and you have -- in a nutshell -- a main reason we're in this mess. :(
Gardenarian
6-19-13, 9:12pm
So-called “global warming” is just a secret ploy by wacko tree-huggers to make America energy independent, clean our air and water, improve the fuel efficiency of our vehicles, kick-start 21st-century industries, and make our cities safer and more livable. Don’t let them get away with it!
— Chip Giller
So-called “global warming” is just a secret ploy by wacko tree-huggers to make America energy independent, clean our air and water, improve the fuel efficiency of our vehicles, kick-start 21st-century industries, and make our cities safer and more livable. Don’t let them get away with it!
— Chip Giller
ha!
I hope so. I live in Georgia. It's August, and we have had only 1 day this year that broke 90. And it was only 91. The 10 day forecast is all in the 80s. This will be the coolest summer I can remember. We've had more rain than we know what to do with. I also saw somewhere recently that Arctic sea ice is at a 10 year high, and fires, tornadoes and hurricanes are all at record lows, so maybe it's not just us.
I had to fire up the woodstove to warm up the house the other day. In August. I've never had to do that before.
We had a week or so of seasonable weather in mid July, since then we've been averaging 10 to 15 degrees below normal. Haven't been in the pool for three weeks cause the water's too cold.
flowerseverywhere
8-6-13, 11:47pm
rainfall last month was 3x average in my area. They are concerned for the everglades wildlife as there is so much water everywhere. Temp is normal but the intense frequent lightning storms, spectacular except for the damage they cause.
iris lilies
8-6-13, 11:50pm
I hope so. I live in Georgia. It's August, and we have had only 1 day this year that broke 90. And it was only 91. The 10 day forecast is all in the 80s. This will be the coolest summer I can remember. We've had more rain than we know what to do with. I also saw somewhere recently that Arctic sea ice is at a 10 year high, and fires, tornadoes and hurricanes are all at record lows, so maybe it's not just us.
I'm with you, we are having a beautiful cool summer, love this new global weather pattern!
After our fire season with dry and hot ended in late June, our weather seems like what I remember summers being like years ago. Temps and rainfall seem about normal. There has been a lot of flash flooding and erosion in the burn areas.
We seem to build up to 2 or 3 steamy days and then get a cool front that gives us beautiful weather for 10 days. The latest front came through last night. Off to the garden!
we are having a beautiful cool summer
Our forecast is for mid 70s next week. In the middle of August in Georgia.
Inconceivable.
It's 55 degrees out right now. In August.
I think I can see the advancing polar ice cap out my window...
https://lh6.googleusercontent.com/-O2WS52LZ_20/UgfZ1ew5qrI/AAAAAAAAIbI/KROIm7LXmMU/s720/Awesomized.jpg
The saying here is that if you don't like the climate here, wait a few minutes. That holds true. We have dry years, wet years, cold years, hot years. I don't know what the "normal" is for here.
Charlie WA
8-13-13, 9:45pm
For the month of July, some states were a lot warmer than normal while other states were a lot colder than normal. Massachusetts and Rhode Island had their warmest July on record, while Alabama had its 5th coldest July on record.
Florida had its wettest July on record, while Oregon had its driest July on record.
http://www.wunderground.com/blog/JeffMasters/show.html
Yep, soon as I posted this thread it sort of switched to summer of my childhood. If I was sure it'll be ski season of my childhood I might be tempted to buy some passes for the upcoming winter....
At this rate we'll be skiing here.
Atlanta cold snap: Why is it sweater weather in the South?
Atlanta looked set to break a second straight record for a lowest maximum temperature on Friday, capping one of the coolest, wettest summers on record for the usually sweltering city.
...
On Aug. 16, a time of year when average daytime temperatures hover at 88 degrees in the Phoenix City, the mercury had stalled at 64 degrees at 1 p.m., six degrees below the record low for a high temperature, set in 1892, of 70 degrees.
Thursday’s 73-degree reading was also the coolest Aug. 15 ever on record in Atlanta, besting a record low high of 77 degrees in 1908.
http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/2013/0816/Atlanta-cold-snap-Why-is-it-sweater-weather-in-the-South
Skiers may be moving from Alta to Atlanta?
Salt Lake City set a new mark for the warmest July ever recorded by the National Weather Service, and August promises to keep up the heat.
Utah’s capital reached a 101-degree high on Wednesday. All that was left was for the official thermometer at Salt Lake City International Airport to remain above 74 degrees until 1 a.m. Thursday to reset the monthly record. When the hour of destiny arrived, the mercury read 75 degrees, giving the month the honors of being the warmest July since records-keeping began in 1874.
http://www.sltrib.com/sltrib/news/56675724-78/july-degrees-lake-salt.html.csp
I'm really curious as to what the winter will bring this year, as the spring and summer have been exceptionally mild. The weather varies alot here anyway, but it sure hasn't been the norm for the warmer months at all.
Well this week it seems like the entire country is going crazy weather-wise. Hot, hot, hot everywhere including the normally cool west coast. 90 today in Santa Cruz, Ca. and 100 just 9 miles inland in the Santa Cruz mountains. Normal temps in the low 70s or 60s. Same for Seattle and Portland. Even higher temps across all of the mid west. Seems like it's been this way all summer. Is this the new normal?
Yossarian
8-30-13, 10:39pm
Let's hope so, it was a record mild summer:
http://stevengoddard.files.wordpress.com/2013/08/screenhunter_436-aug-27-08-29.jpg?w=640&h=393
http://stevengoddard.files.wordpress.com/2013/08/screenhunter_479-aug-28-07-09.jpg
We had a few cooler times over the summer with what seemed like the old norm of rainfall. Recently we have reverted to the new norm of dry and above normal temps. Several schools cancelled classes last week since they are not air conditioned. This summer has definitely been cooler than the last several, but still above the averages for all times.
This has been the driest, mildest summer I can remember. Temperatures generally in the seventies, one or two days of 85-90 degree weather, less than a week of rain. I hope the winter's mild as well. But rainier.
Normal temps in the low 70s or 60s. Same for Seattle and Portland. Even higher temps across all of the mid west. Seems like it's been this way all summer. Is this the new normal?
It's 76 degrees in Seattle at the weather station at my friend's house. Which is within the realm of "normal" for there.
http://fs.weatherspark.com.s3.amazonaws.com/production/reports/month/000/029/735/a1c8d2f8/8/daily_high_and_low_temperature_in_august_temperatu re_f.png
And 68 degrees at my house, about an hour north of Seattle.
All of Arizona hotter and drier than normal. 13th year of drought.
All of Arizona hotter and drier than normal. 13th year of drought.
Not sure where 2013 will settle out but temps haven't been that extreme so far
http://stevengoddard.files.wordpress.com/2013/09/screenhunter_47-sep-01-08-05.jpg
Come on down to AZ and check out the new normal:
"Since 1970, Arizona has warmed at a rate of 0.72 degrees per decade, the fastest among the 50 states, based on an analysis of temperature data by Climate Central, an independent organization that researches and reports on climate."
http://climate-connections.org/2013/07/03/experts-see-new-normal-as-hotter-drier-west-faces-huge-fires/
It's 76 degrees in Seattle at the weather station at my friend's house. Which is within the realm of "normal" for there.
http://fs.weatherspark.com.s3.amazonaws.com/production/reports/month/000/029/735/a1c8d2f8/8/daily_high_and_low_temperature_in_august_temperatu re_f.png
And 68 degrees at my house, about an hour north of Seattle.I guess the weather channel has been wrong :-)! I've been up and down the west coast this past month (just returned yesterday) and it has been very hot everywhere I went - including right at the beaches in places that are normally very cool and foggy (over 100 in some of the coast redwood groves) - and the weather channel had been reporting extreme heat in the upper 90's and hundreds everywhere thru out the country all last week. But that may be unusual. It's hotter and more humid than normal here in SoCall for this time of year. More like early July than Sept.
it has been very hot everywhere I went
But then of course you haven't been everywhere.:~)
I think this year something like 64% of the country was below normal, but CA was part of the country that was above normal. But overall this summer was on the cooler side.
http://stevengoddard.files.wordpress.com/2013/09/screenhunter_114-sep-03-06-17.jpg?w=640&h=452
But then of course you haven't been everywhere.:~)
Ha Ha - true (although I keep trying but the dad blasted hot weather stops me :-)). Probably just a heat wave during the time I am travelling and have access to the weather channel. I just know that I aborted my recent drive further north to Washington because the heat was so high there and in oregon too. Only made it as far as the upper Nor Cal coast and it was very hot there too. And at night, watching The Weather Channel, they kept talking about a huge dome of high pressure over the entire country with temps litterally everywhere well over 90 and how this was the hottest year on record for much of the country, yada yada.... But it may be just a fluke as I see that "everywhere" is now cooler. Except here in SoCal where we are having another heat wave - 102 in LA tomorrow. Geeze, I can't get a break :-)! However I also see lots of charts online that support an increase in temps thru out the country over the last few years and decades. www.noaanews.noaa.gov/stories2011/20110629_newnormals.html
However I also see lots of charts online that support an increase in temps thru out the country over the last few years
Actually they don't talk about it much but there has not been any increase in temperatures for 10-15 years. The amount of any increase over a longer period depends on when you start. Go back a few decades (when the big fear was global cooling and the next ice age) and you can show an increase. Go back and start early last century and there maybe has been no increase since then. Go back even further (to the end of the "little ice age") and then there is an increase again. The big question is what is causing the ups (and downs). But the fact there has been no warming recently isn't really disputed.
http://stevengoddard.files.wordpress.com/2013/09/screenhunter_193-sep-04-06-42.jpg?w=640&h=479
Look at the satellite data. Again, no increase for 15 years
http://wattsupwiththat.files.wordpress.com/2013/08/trend11.gif?w=640&h=480
Note the blue line too, it agrees with the Hadcrut chart above showing DECLINING temps over the last 10 years.
Actually they don't talk about it much but there has not been any increase in temperatures for 10-15 years. The amount of any increase over a longer period depends on when you start. Go back a few decades (when the big fear was global cooling and the next ice age) and you can show an increase. Go back and start early last century and there maybe has been no increase since then. Go back even further (to the end of the "little ice age") and then there is an increase again. The big question is what is causing the ups (and downs). But the fact there has been no warming recently isn't really disputed....
NASA data and charts present a different picture for me.
http://data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/graphs_v3/
NASA data and charts present a different picture for me.
http://data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/graphs_v3/
I don't think you want to rely on Hansen's manipulated data. But for the sake of argument, which data set shows an increase over the last 10 years?
Ever since we had the big el nino in 1998 and transitioned into a cold phase of the pacific decadal oscillation, we have not seen a big increase in the average temperature of the earth. However, ocean temperatures at a depth of 700 meters have continued to increase. Sea level rises due to 2 main reasons: melting glaciers and thermal expansion. We know from physics that water takes up more volume when it warms. Since 1998, sea level has continued to rise as the oceans have warmed.
Since 1998
I've heard the deep ocean theory, but I've never seen good data to support it.
By the way, ocean levels changing is nothing new
http://www.globalwarmingart.com/images/1/1d/Post-Glacial_Sea_Level.png
I don't think you want to rely on Hansen's manipulated data. But for the sake of argument, which data set shows an increase over the last 10 years?
What I see with the charts is that the 2000s were warmer than the 1990s which were warmer than the 1980s, etc. I don't know that there is a particular one that shows this better than another. Since you don't trust NASA data, here are similar charts from the World Meteorological Organization, which perhaps shows this better. I think it is commonly accepted that global temperature increases have slowed over the last decade, which may be a part of normal variation, or maybe 97% of the worlds climate scientists are wrong.
http://www.wunderground.com/news/what-global-warming-looks-20130814
What I see with the charts is that the 2000s were warmer than the 1990s which were warmer than the 1980s, etc.
Yeah, the question is why you see that. Until the last decade or so the temperature records looked like this:
http://stevengoddard.files.wordpress.com/2012/07/screenhunter_137-jul-31-06-18.jpg?w=640&h=450
And then Hansen got hold of them and made a bunch of "adjustments" along these lines:
http://stevengoddard.files.wordpress.com/2012/06/screenhunter_26-jun-22-11-20.jpg?w=640&h=400&h=400
Not everyone agrees with those adjustments, or does the general public realize that what the graphs show isn't actually the measured temperatures, but rather a set of adjustments to measured temperatures that produce the results you observed. You see the effects when you compare side by side:
http://stevengoddard.files.wordpress.com/2010/10/1998changesannotated.gif?w=500&h=355&h=355
And that's why I favor the satellite data that avoids the ability for people with an agenda, one way or the other, to tamper with the data:
http://wattsupwiththat.files.wordpress.com/2013/08/trend11.gif?w=640&h=480
I live on an island in the Pacific. I have 125+ years of sea level data here for hundreds of miles of coastline. It shows *no* sea level rise, here.
Yet I constantly encounter demands from a certain sector of our local environmentalist community that we craft our land use regulations to forbid development within the 20 foot elevation topo line from the high tide line. To protect people from sea level rise. They usually also ask to add another 5-10 feet above that, to allow for storm surge.
Perhaps your island will be asked to accommodate emigrants from these cities:
http://www.good.is/posts/seven-sinking-est-cities-around-the-world
Perhaps your island will be asked to accommodate emigrants from these cities:
http://www.good.is/posts/seven-sinking-est-cities-around-the-world
I suspect they could find greener pastures, if need be. By the time those folks need to move in here, our hairshirt sky-is-falling local environmentalists will likely have removed the ability for humans to live on these islands.
If you draw the 20-30 foot elevation line they are lobbying for here, and look how much of the county becomes legally-uninhabitable, then add on the newly-mandated 200 foot setbacks from that, well, we'll have a couple people clinging to the mountain tops, and that's about it.
Meanwhile, the actual high-tide line here will have stayed the same, or perhaps even retreated. (Our local geology is...interesting. We are still springing back from the last period of glaciation, seems the weight of several miles of ice tends to depress the wee plate we live on.)
Our new normal is lots of wildfire and otherwise a new level of uncertainty as to what weather will do here next. Part of the new normal for DH and me is we've learned how to identify trees bark beetles have infested (bubbles of orange sap) and how to kill them when the next opportunity (June) comes. Once they've doomed a tree to death, they move on to the next weakest tree. The trees are already weakened by drought. The beetles further weaken the trees, making them more vulnerable to wildfire.
Our new normal is lots of wildfire
It's interesting to look at historic trends and what land management practices have done.
http://stevengoddard.files.wordpress.com/2013/09/screenhunter_81-sep-02-09-34.jpg
Have to see what the final yosemite total is but for what it's worth 2013 was a pretty good year so far.
http://stevengoddard.files.wordpress.com/2013/09/screenhunter_73-sep-02-08-02.jpg
I live on an island in the Pacific. I have 125+ years of sea level data here for hundreds of miles of coastline. It shows *no* sea level rise, here.
Yet I constantly encounter demands from a certain sector of our local environmentalist community that we craft our land use regulations to forbid development within the 20 foot elevation topo line from the high tide line. To protect people from sea level rise. They usually also ask to add another 5-10 feet above that, to allow for storm surge.
I was in the store the other day and noticed the recent National Geographic cover story,
As the planet warms, the sea rises. Coastlines flood. What will we protect? What will we abandon? How will we face the danger of rising seas?
http://ngm.nationalgeographic.com/2013/09/rising-seas/folger-text
I was in the store the other day and noticed the recent National Geographic cover story,
As the planet warms, the sea rises. Coastlines flood. What will we protect? What will we abandon? How will we face the danger of rising seas?
http://ngm.nationalgeographic.com/2013/09/rising-seas/folger-text
I get Natl Geographic and since I live nowhere near an ocean, was feeling smug about this article. Not so smug today :(
ApatheticNoMore
9-13-13, 12:08am
Maybe that's what that bizarre commercial about flood insurance when you live nowhere near the ocean is about. I never could figure out what it was about. :)
I told DH yesterday that he chose wisely when he bought our house (before we met and married). It's partway up a hill and close to a pond but not a river. Therefore I have not been worried about needing to leave, though some of my friends in town and elsewhere have go bags ready at the moment. Folks in the burn areas if they didn't get out are having to shelter in place-there is no access. Military vehicles can barely get through and not on all roads.
Maybe the climate change thing means patterns are more likely to get 'stuck'? I'm not sure I've seen any scientific evidence of this, and the last couple of years may just be flukes or perception. We were stuck in a drought almost all of 2012, and were sort of normal this year (though April had a recurring pattern of snow/warm/snow). Now we're stuck with the moisture just coming and coming. It's still raining today, unfortunately.
RosieTR, you may find this interesting:
http://qz.com/124389/everything-that-led-to-colorados-record-breaking-flood-and-why-it-will-only-get-worse/
It's about your "stuck" comment exactly. And why no local observation of "hey, it's so cold and rainy here, how can there be global warming?" is worth anything.
It's not about hot. It's about stuck. And all the charts in the world mean nothing to someone who's been watching weather for five decades and is paying attention to this.
Up here, half the sky is bright blue, the other half is thunder and lightning. It's fascinating, in a weird way.
Out to dig more trenches to lead water away from our house, before the rain starts again....
RosieTR, you may find this interesting:
http://qz.com/124389/everything-that-led-to-colorados-record-breaking-flood-and-why-it-will-only-get-worse/
It's about your "stuck" comment exactly. And why no local observation of "hey, it's so cold and rainy here, how can there be global warming?" is worth anything.
It's not about hot. It's about stuck. And all the charts in the world mean nothing to someone who's been watching weather for five decades and is paying attention to this.
Up here, half the sky is bright blue, the other half is thunder and lightning. It's fascinating, in a weird way.
Out to dig more trenches to lead water away from our house, before the rain starts again....
Thanks, yeah that is really interesting! Seems similar in the Midwest too-flood-drought-flood, also TX and CA. Good luck with the digging-I see there's another flash flood warning for your area :-(
RosieTR, you may find this interesting:
http://qz.com/124389/everything-that-led-to-colorados-record-breaking-flood-and-why-it-will-only-get-worse/
It's about your "stuck" comment exactly. And why no local observation of "hey, it's so cold and rainy here, how can there be global warming?" is worth anything.
It's not about hot. It's about stuck. And all the charts in the world mean nothing to someone who's been watching weather for five decades and is paying attention to this.
So the theory is:
Recent research is building toward a theory that the loss of more than 80% of the Arctic ice cap over the last couple of decades may be destabilizing weather patterns, causing blocks to form more frequently. Here’s why: As the Arctic regions warm at two or three times the rate of the rest of the globe, the difference in temperature between the Arctic and the tropics gets smaller. That slows down the jet stream, like cars stuck in traffic.
I wonder how the recent events fit that pattern when this summer the Arctic was very cold?
http://ocean.dmi.dk/arctic/plots/meanTarchive/meanT_2013.png
Resulting in ice coverage being up 60% this year?
http://www.aari.ru/resources/d0015/arctic/gif.en/2013/20130910.GIF
If you need help translating that, this one shows new ice in green and missing ice (from last year) in red. It almost matches some years from the 70s
http://stevengoddard.files.wordpress.com/2013/09/screenhunter_478-sep-12-08-46.jpg?w=640
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions Inc. All rights reserved.